Kind of glossed over some things. Yes, in many cases vitamin supplements are only needed if you have a poor diet or other condition interfering with your required levels. Yes, Vitamin C is not going to cure a cold.

But, there are still studies being done that show it 'might' have a long term effect on cancer if you get your minimum daily requirement. There are also studies being done on other vitamin usage for long term disease factors.

So, while you really don't want or need to overdose yourself with vitamin supplements, it doesn't hurt to make sure you are getting the proper amount daily either by eating healthy or taking a supplement to fill in what you do need.

Then again, it is the tagline that he ruins stuff, so I can see why he would leave it a bit vague for comedy.

Seems like a pretty good analysis.

Taking just about any supplement just for the sake of it, is pretty much like eating lollies, except they aren't tasty, and can have side effects. It's not really that calcium supplements are the main problem, it's that people are gullible.

What are the best things one can do for bone health?

1. weight bearing exercise (bones respond and become stronger)
2. vege's - especially leafy green vege's
3. vit d - get some sunlight most days

and... avoid smoking.

OK, his studies beat my anecdotal bias.

...That being said, I will continue to eat breakfast cereal with milk pretty much every day (as I have since I was very very young), and be strongly tempted to attribute my own lack of having ever broken a bone to that.

The other anecdote I have in my favor is coming from a farm family that raised chickens. I grew up in a prairie grassland area (converted to irrigated farmland thanks to aquifer access), while my cousins lived a couple hours away in limestone hills ranchland. Both of our families raised free range chickens.

Our chickens produced very thin-shelled eggs, and displayed behavior to suggest they were calcium-deprived. For example, our chickens wouldn't cannibalize their own viable eggs, but if we threw empty shells to them they would fight to eat the shells. Same but to a lesser extent for leftover bones, etc. (I assume they fought less over these because bones are harder to near impossible to break down with a beak). On the other side of the table, we sometimes exchanged eggs with my cousins, and their chicken's eggs were always extremely thick-shelled and hard to crack open.

When I asked about that, my folks told me (and later my Biology teacher confirmed) that was because the sod/soil around my home and flora and fauna growing from it contained very little natural calcium. Chickens raised in our area would often be supplemented with commercial feed that contained extra calcium, but we let ours range for food and eat table scraps; almost never supplementing their food with any commercial stuff. But the limestone (aka calcium carbonate) around my cousin's house contained very high amounts of natural calcium, which was naturally infused into the plants / grains / insects that their chickens ate, giving them incredibly thick shells.

So, I guess that while calcium intake apparently doesn't have a very statistically significant impact on human bone growth, I think that it must have a much more significant role to play in egg thickness if you happen to be a chicken... At least if you compare extremes of low natural calcium diet versus extremely high natural calcium diet.

You call stating and exercising your rights as returning harassment?

The thing is, you don't fight an issue on one front. This is one method of exposure and it is perfectly effective and reasonable.

It can supplement other contributions or just get people interested in a topic they might not have known existed if they had to start with something substantially more dense.

Not every expenditure of energy needs to change the world or solve a problem. Some things are good for their own purpose and are justified by just that.

The thing is, there are already well established nutrition supplement shakes that have been around for years with lots of clinical data to support their effectiveness, and moreover they cost less than half as much as Soylent. You can find them at every grocery story and pharmacy. I myself tend to keep a 12 pack of the generic equivalent of Ensure Plus around for when I oversleep or get home too late to cook or something and it's better to slug one down than to miss a meal.

I thought perhaps it was satire or something, but it seems to be a real product.... why would you name a nutritional supplement Soylent? I mean nobody during the naming stage pointed out the movie?

A little history can go a long way. They were in the fight by choice 3 years before we were dragged into action, and over 15% of their nation enlisted, over 10% of their nation fought overseas, a higher percentage than the US for much longer. We hardly protected them from the Japanese, they protected and hosted US.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_history_of_New_Zealand_during_World_War_II
When Japan entered the war in December 1941, the New Zealand Government raised another expeditionary force, known as the 2nd N.Z.E.F. In the Pacific, or 2nd N.Z.E.F. (I.P.), for service with the Allied Pacific Ocean Areas command. This force supplemented existing garrison troops in the South Pacific. The main fighting formation of the 2nd N.Z.E.F. (I.P.) comprised the New Zealand 3rd Division. However, the 3rd Division never fought as a formation; its component brigades became involved in semi-independent actions as part of the Allied forces in the Solomons, Treasury Islands and Green Island.
Eventually, American formations replaced the New Zealand army units in the Pacific, which released personnel for service with the 2nd Division in Italy, or to cover shortages in the civilian labour-force. New Zealand Air Force squadrons and Navy units contributed to the Allied island-hopping campaign.

http://www.nzhistory.net.nz/war/us-forces-in-new-zealand
"The American soldier found himself ‘deep in the heart of the South Seas’, in the words of his army-issue pocket guide. He usually came here either before or immediately after experiencing the horror of war on a Pacific island, and he found a land of milk and honey (literally), of caring mothers and ‘pretty girls’."
"So the ‘American invasion’ (as New Zealanders affectionately called it) brought a considerable clash of cultures. "

Sorry to inconvenience your feelings and expressions of superiority with some facts.

I use slightly less than that myself on average, but we have solar water heating (supplemented with gas), so that's a good savings (especially since it also heats the hot tub), and we replaced all our light bulbs with led bulbs when they became feasible last year. Now, we usually read between 400 and 1000 watts during the day (depending on how many lights I have on, and if the refrigerator is cycled on or not.) That's running a big screen TV, computer, and often ps4 almost all day, every day. We also have electric stove and oven...and I weld, adding somewhat to our total.

Yes, my battery bank is only useful for power outages. It's enough to keep the lights on and the fridge from thawing, but not much else. We get about 3-4 hours out of it if I don't notice the power went out, but can make it all night if we conserve. Our system is grid tied, and first powers the home, then tops off the batteries, then sells any excess to PG&E. To date, I've never drawn the batteries down to zero...but we do have a small generator to supplement it when the power's out for days. The average home would certainly need more, but a 10kwh battery should be plenty to make it through an average night without AC (we don't have AC here).

My current system could not produce that much, but close. I live in N California, one of the foggiest areas in the US. Because we have a renter, an electric hot tub, dishwasher, and electric washer and drier, we use slightly more than we generate at this point, but my system is upgradeable to 6500 watts of generation (I have less than 1/3 of that now) when panels get cheaper...and when I can find space for more.

My system is not flat to my roof, and I have 2 strings of 8 panels. With the solar water tubes, it takes up most of the south 1/2 of my roof (1200 sq ft home). I could maybe fit 4 more panels up there and still be able to walk around them to clean them, but any more and I'll need some mounting structure. I really want to add a small wind turbine to generate at night or when there's a storm...solar doesn't work in the dark.

In America, we still have some rebates for people adding solar to their homes, but they are drying up fast. 15-20 years ago, you could almost do it for free if you got every rebate available.

We used to have about 1-2 weeks of power outage where I live per year, and that was part of why we did they system. We hated having no power and losing food every year, and also hated paying the ever rising cost of electricity. Before adding our system, we had $4-500 a month electric bills, now we have <$100 in winter and sometimes a negative bill in summer...we pay our bill once a year now, lump sum at the end of 12 months.
On to your second post....
I often think...electric cars were popular and the norm in cities before Ford came along. It's still astonishing to me that it was basically dropped for a century as a technology (with minor exceptions). I'm glad someone had finally gone back to it and is trying to fix it's issues. If I could afford a Tesla, I would have one.

I also agree, people won't adopt the technology as long as they have to sacrifice lifestyle for it. I said the same thing, but I found that I don't change my lifestyle at all with my solar system, I just pay lower bills. I determined that buying a system would pay for itself in under 10 years, with the lifespan of a system being about 20 years, that's 10 years of free electricity! That all assumes electric rates didn't go up, and they certainly have gone up...but not for me. You just need to be sure you install enough panels to supply all your power, and you're there.

The battery thing is really mostly for non-grid tied systems, or emergencies. Most people don't use batteries at night, it's simpler and cheaper to just sell power to the grid during the day and buy it back at night if you can, using them as your battery. Perhaps this battery will change that, but with lead acid, it's hard to make them worth the cost.

Panels aren't that expensive, really. In many areas, with rebates, they can be near free. (some companies will even give them to you and split the power generated off your roof). It's a myth that solar is expensive...when compared to non-solar. Mine are paid for by bill savings already (8 years + in) so I'm saving money with them now, and my lifestyle has not suffered in the least. I have lights on if its dark, I watch TV all day, and use the computer all day, have tons of electric devices I use, and soon will power a pond, etc. I often think that my life is a much better example of how you can be 'green' without much change than Gore's. He really doesn't seem to walk the walk, but he can sure talk the talk.

Not actually a translation of the original, these lyrics are originally from the Studio Ghibli movie Whisper of the Heart.

From wikipedia: "The songs were actually translated by producer Toshio Suzuki's daughter Mamiko with Hayao Miyazaki writing supplemental lyrics. "

Update on Supplements: Healthcare Triage News has been added as a related post - related requested by ChaosEngine on that post.

Wait...please explain how your sisters situation not working out? She was paying $500 a month, now she pays nothing and CAN'T be refused if her policy lapses (which now can't happen). If Medicare doesn't cover everything her original plan did, she could buy a supplemental plan that would for way less than $500 a month.
I agree there are winners and losers in the plan, but that sounds like a winner to me.
Every gripe I've ever heard about the ACA would have been solved 100% by a single payer system for all, Obama's original plan. Too bad that failed to be even considered.

Yep, I understand and agree with your comment.

I think part of the problem is that people aren't going to the source for their information regarding the outcomes of studies, etc. I think many people see click-bait and end up getting linked to sites that seem legit but almost invariably tout homeopathic remedies, have a "flu beating" supplement or book to sell you or harbour some other ulterior agenda. These sites often quote studies but fail to provide citations.

I'd further argue that since many people have a distrust of corporations/government and most have an instinct to protect themselves and their children, there is a tendency towards confirmation bias when they are doing their research.

With that said, we still need to be aware that new information from studies is surfacing all the time and questions about safety or efficacy should not be ignored.

This is fantastic and much more humane. I love honey in all its forms. I buy jars from a local bee farmer that include a chunk of honey comb because I love to chew on it, and he sells me Bee Pollen that I use as a vitamin & mineral supplement that is all natural and local.

I hope a lot of farmers adopt this method but I also hope my local guy keeps at least one 'natural' hive so I can keep chewing on honey comb.

Come on *Canada get your shit together. Bunch of fuckin' savages

I am however interested in knowing what kicked off a pre game team wide brawl.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Key members of a Ligue Nord-Américaine de Hockey (LNAH) franchise have been suspended until the end of the 2016-17 playoffs following a hot-tempered brawl during the pre-game warmup on Sunday.

The Laval Predators, who play in the infamously fight-happy LNAH, were involved in a melee before the puck drop on a game against the St-Georges Cool-FM.

Predators co-owner Eric Lajeunesse, CEO Lucien Paquette and assistant coach Dannick Lessard all received two-season bans on Tuesday.

The eight-team, Quebec-based LNAH, which is considered a "low-level professional league", is known for its outrageous behaviour, with footage of a bizarre on-ice scene going viral seemingly every other month.

Other supplemental discipline, announced on Wednesday, include:

LAVAL: Maxime Bouchard and Clint Butler (suspended for remainder of season/playoffs); Steven Oligny (7 games); Joe Rullier and Chris Cloutier (6 games); Philippe Pepin (5 games); Jonathan Oligny (4 games)

ST-GEORGES: Yannick Dallaire (3 games); Alexandre Gauthier and Jean-Michel Biron (2 games)

http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Hockey/2015/01/14/22180411.html

Stevia is too new to make any real determinations on. Currently, there is a lot of uncertainty. Just because something comes from a plant doesn't make it safer. Almonds used to be loaded with cyanide before we eliminated the trees that had those kinds of almonds. There have been recent studies questioning the safety of stevia, and this will likely be dealt with over the next decade. Unfortunately, certain countries have gotten around the necessary procedures for sufficient scientific inquiry because they are marketing it not as a food additive or sweetener but as a dietary supplement, which makes it easier to avoid such scrutiny. Unlike xylitol, which is perfectly fine for human consumption and has been shown to inhibit growth of oral bacteria that leads to caries and plaque, stevia is simply an unknown at this point.

However, stevia has also been around for a while. It has been a product since the 90s and has been banned and un-banned in numerous countries. European reports have shown that it is safe, but it is also still banned in many countries there.

For those of you think that it is "natural" and thus safer, I urge you to look up the naturalistic fallacy on wikipedia before going any further here. It has also been used as a sweetener by certain tribal peoples for centuries, so that means absolutely nothing as far as science goes, but it will still sway many people over, just like traditional herbal Chinese medicines like tiger penis powder and rhinoceros horn powder.

However, it is not a "natural" substance whatsoever, even though that word means nothing in nutrition anyways. Basically they take a small amount of Rebaudioside A from the stevia plant and use a bunch of alcohols and other chemicals to extract out the active sweetening ingredient and then crystallize it. This is then renamed steviol. It is significantly less sweet than most of the other sweeteners, except maybe saccarin, at only about 150x the sweetness of sugar.

Basically, Stevia is probably not bad for you, although the verdict is definitely not in on this one. It is no more "natural" than any of the other sweeteners. You need more of it to reach the same level of sweetness as your other sweeteners so dosage could be an issue. But you have to understand that each of the companies that makes these sweeteners has to find a way to sell their product. So, what do they do? They claim that their sweetener is "natural" and "safe" which implies that all of the other sweeteners that came before it aren't, and as evidence by my previous tirades, this is simply not the case. But they profit from our unwillingness to look at the data for ourselves and play on our natural tendencies to trust them.

In short, we are not certain about stevia yet, but we are certain that sugar is bad and aspartame is fine. However, you probably shouldn't eat any processed food, but we already know that in our bones. We all know that cooking up a delicious meal from simple ingredients is the best way to eat healthy but we don't do it because we are lazy. I am just as guilty of this as the next person. We can only dream of a future similar to "The Invention of Lying" where marketers aren't allowed to lie to us and can simply say that their food is bad for you but you drink it because it tastes good and because you have been for years. A world where they can't market to our children so we don't all grow up addicted to halloween candy or cereals that are more sugar than grains. The best way to do this is to cut your cable from the television and live on the internet with AdBlock installed. Then those fuckers can't get at you as easily.